Thread Tools

So as the Copenhagen/Hopenhagen meeting are happening within a week I though this article about tree ring data was especially timely. The goal is for a Global tax to 'reduce' CO2. It will involve a massive transfer of wealth. This BTW in top of the 650 in taxes from Waxman/Markey.

This is based on the famous IPCC reports which scream of an impending calamity. The report had a lynchpin the Hockey stick graph which helped Algore his Nobel prize.

The article below is Oct 2, 2009 about 6 weeks before the Climategate whistleblower released the emails detailing the abuse of the scientific method and fraud engaged in by the AGW cabal at CRU and in the US.

The author Ross McKitrick had been working on the hockey stick issue for a number of years. He give a good history of that. In particular he talks of the data and the issues with the data and how it was cherry picked to give the desired(?) results.

The actually got ahold of some of the tree ring data when Briffa published one of his articles in a journal that required that he make data avaiable.

The IPCC relied on these studies to defend the Hockey Stick view, and since it had appointed Briffa himself to be the IPCC Lead Author for this topic, there was no chance it would question the Yamal data.
.....

Despite the fact that these papers appeared in top journals like Nature and Science, none of the journal reviewers or editors ever required Briffa to release his Yamal data. Steve McIntyre's repeated requests for them to uphold their own data disclosure rules were ignored.

Of course we now know that the AGW cabal had 'their people' in the editorial roles in these journals and they were protecting 'their guys'

...

He quickly found a large set of 34 up-to-date core samples, taken from living trees in Yamal by none other than Schweingruber himself!Had these been added to Briffa's small group the 20th century would simply be flat.

Click to expand...

Jones head of the CRU has been asked to step down while an investigation inthe methods and destruction of data at CRU is reviewed. Some feel the CRU is trying to get ahead of the situation to protect Jones from an independent investigation. We shall see.

Now that it's been established that the skeptics have been reduced to hacking emails and distorting the contents of those emails, I think they have harmed themselves.

As far as this most recent nonsense by the skeptics, the following link provides a rather detailed look at the hockey stick and how it holds up under a variety of scenarios. Of course, the skeptics, who are looking more pathetic than ever, are becoming a laughing stock in the global warming circles:

So along comes Steve McIntyre, self-styled slayer of hockey sticks, who declares without any evidence whatsoever that Briffa didnât just reprocess the data from the Russians, but instead supposedly picked through it to give him the signal he wanted. These allegations have been made without any evidence whatsoever.

McIntyre has based his âcritiqueâ on a test conducted by randomly adding in one set of data from another location in Yamal that he found on the internet. People have written theses about how to construct tree ring chronologies in order to avoid end-member effects and preserve as much of the climate signal as possible. Curiously no-one has ever suggested simply grabbing one set of data, deleting the trees you have a political objection to and replacing them with another set that you found lying around on the web.

Now that it's been established that the skeptics have been reduced to hacking emails and distorting the contents of those emails, I think they have harmed themselves.

Click to expand...

What skeptic hacked emails links and proof please. This is a smear. It is far more likely this is a leak by an insider. AFAIK no one has been established as the person(s) who released the emails and more importantly the computer files and data.

The emails when combined with the actions of the IPCC and the climate journals plaint a picture. The spin from the AGW religionist is pathetic in this case.

As far as this most recent nonsense by the skeptics, the following link provides a rather detailed look at the hockey stick and how it holds up under a variety of scenarios. Of course, the skeptics, who are looking more pathetic than ever, are becoming a laughing stock in the global warming circles:

So along comes Steve McIntyre, self-styled slayer of hockey sticks, who declares without any evidence whatsoever that Briffa didnât just reprocess the data from the Russians, but instead supposedly picked through it to give him the signal he wanted. These allegations have been made without any evidence whatsoever.

McIntyre has based his âcritiqueâ on a test conducted by randomly adding in one set of data from another location in Yamal that he found on the internet. People have written theses about how to construct tree ring chronologies in order to avoid end-member effects and preserve as much of the climate signal as possible. Curiously no-one has ever suggested simply grabbing one set of data, deleting the trees you have a political objection to and replacing them with another set that you found lying around on the web.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the link. This post in RC you cite is of course a response to the article I link from McKitrick from the Financial Post.

This post is from 6 weeks before the fraud at RC and their comrades are the CRU was exposed. THe information in the computer files (esp the HArry files) show that McKitrick was correct n his assessment and that the RC/ECU cabal lied, and were committing scientific fraud because the cooked the data.

You are digging a deeper hole for your position Patters. They based their warming on results from 3! TREES. The determined the planet was warming because of 3 TREES while ignoring other trees in the same area that negated their predetermined conclusion.

We are supposed to throw away our way of life because of 3 TREES!!!!!!!!!

Some more climate gate articles. 3 on the hearings in US House of Rep/ and 1 from Canada. I will post the links without excerpts. The upshot of these articles is. The gov reps acknowledge that there are problems that are exposed by the emails and data from CRU but claim that even though the data was cooked and peer review was used to exclude research that didn't support AGW, it doesn't matter, SAY WHAT???????????

They want the power and the $$$$$$$$$$$. Doesn't matter what the science is.

What skeptic hacked emails links and proof please. This is a smear. It is far more likely this is a leak by an insider. AFAIK no one has been established as the person(s) who released the emails and more importantly the computer files and data.

The emails when combined with the actions of the IPCC and the climate journals plaint a picture. The spin from the AGW religionist is pathetic in this case.

Click to expand...

I think it's fairly obvious that skeptics hacked the emails, but I agree it would be useful to have proof. I hope there's a full investigation.

patsfan13 said:

Thanks for the link. This post in RC you cite is of course a response to the article I link from McKitrick from the Financial Post.

This post is from 6 weeks before the fraud at RC and their comrades are the CRU was exposed. THe information in the computer files (esp the HArry files) show that McKitrick was correct n his assessment and that the RC/ECU cabal lied, and were committing scientific fraud because the cooked the data.

You are digging a deeper hole for your position Patters. They based their warming on results from 3! TREES. The determined the planet was warming because of 3 TREES while ignoring other trees in the same area that negated their predetermined conclusion.

We are supposed to throw away our way of life because of 3 TREES!!!!!!!!!

If it's correct that the 34 data points were simply picked up off the internet and plotted, then it does not sound like much of a scientific method. I believe I posted an article that talked in general about the problems that trees create because their behavior with regard to temperature changes is not all that simple. Once again, it comes down to which models are being used. From the link I provided, it sounds like McIntyre's approach was not scientifically sound and the evidence of the hockey stick appears overwhelming, unless you very selectively cherry pick data. But, numerous data sets seem to support the hockey stick.

As far as your links, so far the right wing media is trying to turn the ambiguous hacked emails into a scandal, but I don't think they're really getting very far. Fox News, the Washington Times, and the WSJ can do their best to fight for the oil companies and Saudi Arabia, but most of the MSM is keeping the story in perspective. As far as the right wing in Congress go, they're irrelevant right now especially on this scandal.

With regards the private e-mails posted on the internet, I think the story is a simple one and it could apply to any one of us. Think of all the e-mails you have written over the past 10 years. Now imagine that someone ciminally breaks into your e-mail account and downloads all of them, handpicks a few and posts them on the internet to cast you in a particular light. We could all be shown to be saints or sinners or anything in between.
Now look at what has happened with these scientists going about their work in much the same way anyone of us might attend to our job. Enough said.

The Cat Is Out Of The Bag
They can twist and spin all they want this isn't going away, tell your kids to buy that SUV if they want and tell them they won't be killing a Polar Bear if they have a smokey campfire on the beach.

All the pasty faced liberal granola eaters can start using Deodorant again too.